comment #1

Scott Feinberg says ...

Why, then, give this guy's movie any exposure?

comment #2

GKLondon says ...

Well done Mr. Greyson, I echo your sentiments exactly and find the entire situation and lack of international acknowledgment appalling. I spent a few years working for Al Jazeera English (no, I've never filmed a terrorist in a cave) and though the channels coverage was way to biased in the opposite direction, I always responded to the fact that at least there was someone willing to put forward the other side of the story.

My company also has done a few documentaries on the subject, my business partner and old friend is Palestinian so we lean towards Human Rights work involving this region.

Here's the first half of one of the more relevant docs. It's old, and one of the first we did, so forgive the plangent tone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7niFoCdCe4&feature=fvst

What do you have to say about this Mr. Wells? Where do your sympathies lie and does this withdrawal hold any resonance for you? How is the subject of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict handled in the US? I'd be very curious to know....

comment #3

Sabina E says ...

This is one of the best news I've read this week.

comment #4

Edward says ...

I concur with DeafBrown and GK, now if only the US would put more pressure on Israel to clean up their act towards the Palestinians: building walls, creating ghettos. One would think Israel would see the parallels.

comment #5

hollyman says ...

Wow; Blame Israel and only Israel.... Not like the Palestinians haven;t done as much if not more violence... Wow Between Deaf & Edward being so one sided no wonder Antisemitism is at an all time high...

comment #6

joncro says ...

Anti Israeli feelings are NOT antisemitism. Take it from a Jew who doesn't support Israel.

comment #7

GKLondon says ...

To criticise the behaviour of Israel is NOT the same thing as antisemitism. I do not think that anyone here has qualified their criticism by saying that it is because Israelis are Jewish that their administration behaves in the manner that they do. And of course the Palestinians have not helped their situation, especially not when dividing themselves into factions and continuing to shoot homemade rockets into civilian areas. They are demonised internationally, Israel are not, that is the main cause for outrage.

Plus, antisemitism is technically incorrect: semites are any peoples from the southwestern aisan region, therefore Palestinians are semites too.

comment #8

Steven Kar says ...

I'm a fan of GKLondon now.

Good comment.

comment #9

Howlingman says ...

For anyone interested, here's TIFF's response:

http://www.tiff.net/livefromthefestival/openlettercitytocity

comment #10

ROTC says ...

It's frightening to read what a bunch of suckers most of you are.

The Palestinian people have always been and continue to be uncompromisingly committed to the complete destruction of the state of Israel and the annihilation of all Israeli citizens. That is the central unifying element of their doctrine, and they have never been the least bit willing to amend it. There has never been a single genuinely moderate voice with any impact amongst the Palestinians, and their hard-liners have consistently been the overwhelming winners in their elections (whenever their leaders have allowed them).

It's all too easy to look at the suffering that Palestinians face and blame it on Israel and its supporters when in reality, as a people, it is all wholly (and, I dare say, strategically) self-inflicted.

comment #11

GKLondon says ...

ROTC, do you know any Palestinian people? At all? Any? Ever?

I know quite a few, and NONE have EVER stated ANY interest in the destruction of Israel. Where has this strident opinion of yours originated? Yes, Palestinian leaders have used the conflict in elections and at rallys to galvanise public opinion, but they are no more guilty of it than Bush or Netanyahu or any other leader exploiting conflict for their own means.

Please, if I'm wrong, I'll admit it.

comment #12

Steven Kar says ...

I don't participate in these kinds of posts, especially ones about the conflict in the Mid-East just because it makes me so furious and derpressed how misinformed, gullible and uneducated people are about it, especially people in this country who aren't even from there and have no idea what's really going on! But I'm glad that someone like GKLondon is at least enlightened enough about what's going on there and is taking the time to respond to the misinformed, misguided, benighted posters on this page.

comment #13

ROTC says ...

GK, what possible difference does it make what your handful of friends say (and that's only what they say to your face)? The entire Palestinian Charter is about the purported illegitimacy and destruction of the state of Israel. Palestinian leaders have stated with great ferocity that there will be no victory until all Israelis are driven into the sea. Palestinian schoolbooks are now filled with traditional anti-Semitic imagery. And those are just a few of the driving facts that you are pooh-poohing here.

I am at work now and can no longer argue these well-established points. Do some real empirical research. You'll see.

comment #14

Gnome de Guerre says ...

Most people taking a stand on this conflict think they understand what's going on there and they don't.

Unless you've heard the Israeli side from Israeli sources and understood it (whether you agreed or not), and heard the Palestinian side from Palestinian sources and understood it (again, whether you agreed or not), just know your opinion is based on a lack of understanding.

You have to see both sides and know where they're coming from before you take sides and have your opinion mean anything. Most anti-Israel and anti-Palestinian sentiment I've heard is based on news reports. Some claim American news is skewed, some claim European news is skewed the other way. If that's your sources, your opinion is skewed.

Calling the Gaza war a "massacre", and equating Israeli/Palestinian separation to "apartheid", FYI, is using subjective, politically charged, skewed, language that betrays the fact you haven't looked at both sides of the story with an eye toward understanding them. The fact that some American Jews support this language is unfortunate, because it gives the impression it's objective, coming from an honest place of self-criticism, when in fact it's a reaction to seeing blood and bloody headlines, feeling guilty, and needing to distance oneself from the perceived goings-on.

Where do my biases stand? I'm an Israeli American, who wants peace, and believes the Palestinians deserve a homeland. I didn't use to believe they deserved compromise, but I've befriended enough Palestinians over the years, and read enough of their stories in their own words to learn otherwise However, I don't believe Israel is the villain nor do I believe the Palestinians are. There are villains on both sides, and in both governments, there are poor people caught up in tragedy on both sides, and there are fighters on both sides. The ones who are the most dangerous are the ones who are one-sided, whether they are one-sided violent fanatics, or one-sided fanatic peaceniks who don't know when to brandish a gun.

If you or anyone you are listening to or reading is making you feel it's black and white, making you feel one sided is the bully and the other the underdog, have enough self-awareness to know you don't know shit. This is gray through and through, some of the messiest history and animosities you can get your hands in, and Grayson, Deaf, Edward, GKLondon don't get that apparently.

The key to peace IMO is spreading understanding of both sides where there's understanding and sympathy for only one of them. Taking one-sided "stands" is being part of the problem not the solution.

comment #15

p.Vice says ...

Come on, Gnome. This is America, the land of clearly established Right and Wrong. We don't have time to empathize with TWO sides of a massive clusterfuck!

comment #16

GKLondon says ...

Gnome de guere,

I do lean towards sympathising with the Palestinian people, as a result of my closest friend being Palestinian, but I think I've indicated above that I do not see this as a black and white issue. I also know many Israelis (ROTC, I don't just have a 'handful of Palestinian friends', but know a lot of the journalistic community, from bloggers to print journalists to documentarians, and have spent time with many Palestinian families. I also know many Israelis too).

I don't take a stand on this issue precisely because it is such a grey issue and the only thing that will bring it to an end is when each side can sympathise with the other. What I do take issue with is the international media's treatment of the situation as a precisely what you say, a black and white issue, and expressed as such above. I am not completely in line with Al Jazeera English, I'm just glad that another side of the issue is exposed. Admittedly, they simply swap the black and the white. I am Irish and have seen in my family and the city of Dublin the real world effects of such a grey conflict in the North, and understand that on both sides, the real issue lies in the fact that most people simply want to have a life and it is usually these people who pay for the prolonging of the conflict.

The solution lies in the machinations of the conversion that you implied you yourself have had: you met the 'other side' and the human face altered your perception. That the media refuses to put this human face front and centre with regards to the conflict is my greatest cause of outrage.

I am aware of the history of the region, that 50 years ago, the Israelis would seem to be the terrorists. I do not want you to think that there is any attempt to demonise Israelis that I would put my name to.

ROTC, I think it is pretty clear that I consider actual Palestinain or Israeli opinion to differ from that of their leaders. If I based my impressions of a people on charters or the foundations of their nation, like the Palestinian charter you mentioned, I would think that all Americans were sensible atheists, that all Irish people never used a condom, and that the Zimbabwean economy really was in a fine state. Yes I've spoken with some Palestinians, mostly elderly, who have a deeply ingrained negative association against Judaism, but I think the difference here is I've spoken to these people, and not gleaned information from TV news or Wikipedia. It is a small group of top tier individuals on BOTH sides that continue these manifestos. Most people just want to get on with things. Like you with your workday.

comment #17

DavidF says ...

Clearly this is going to touch off a whole thing. My impression is that Greyson is making a typical New Left stance against Israel, as his right, of course.

He states as a fact what is clearly an opinion: the the film festival has taken Israel's "side" by showing a series of films about Tel Aviv.

His little boycottl strikes me as pointless, especially given that Tel Aviv is a left-wing, modern town. Greyson shows a bit of ignorance when he wonders about all the Palestinians displaced by Tel Aviv. There weren't any - Tel Aviv was a swamp north of Jaffa, which is where the Arabs live. His comparisons to Montgomery etc. show a fundamental misunderstanding of either history or the present or both.

Greyson doesn't accomplish anything by doing this and it certainly doesn't strike me as a "pro-peace" stance any as much as an "anti-Israel" stance. And while I certainly do not think Greyson or his move is anti-Semitic, it does display a shocking double standard.

Since Greyson made the connection to queer issues I will point out a big fallacy of this kind of "new left" thinking. Just because Palestinians and Queers are typically regarded as "oppressed" does not mean they are on the same team.

Tel Aviv and Jerusalem have pride day parades. I assure you there weren't any in Gaza or Ramallah this year and if Mr. Greyson is looking to hit some gay bars in the Mid East I wouldn't try Amman, Riyadh, Cairo or a lot of other places around there either.

I think it's pretty clear which country out of the 25 or so in the Mid East is most likely to screen a film about "brutal anti-gay violence" no matter where Mr. Greyson draws his rhetorical lines.

For all its faults - and they are many - Israel is pretty clearly the freeer, more open society and has been for a long time. If that makes me sound like some head-in-the-sand, pro-Zionist, anti-Palestinian dude...whatever.

I basically agree with what Gnome said; most people who have opinions on this have little sense of the context or the real players. They hear "apartheid" and they see shots of refugee camps and react accordingly. But there is a lot more to the picture on both sides.

comment #18

hunterd says ...

Hamas, Hezbollah ect. are willing to murder Palestinian children (by putting schools on top of weapons depots) in order to make Israel look bad to people who don't read past the first paragraph of news stories.

This is a pretty clear indication of where these groups are morally.

Now, I'm no fan of Israel, I have never and will never visit the country because I disagree with the government policies. But let's be honest, if Hamas stopped firing rockets, things would calm down a lot. If Israel stopped responding with overwhelming force...well, ever Jewish man, woman, and child would be dead within 24 hours.

comment #19

hunterd says ...

"At the end of his email he wrote, ""Isn't such an uncritical celebration of Tel Aviv right now akin to celebrating Montgomery buses in 1963, California grapes in 1969, Chilean wines in 1973, Nestles infant formula in 1984, or South African fruit in 1991?"

And this is such a bullshit point. Equivocation, top to bottom. Completely without logic or merit.

Guys; Hitler was Hitler. Stalin was Stalin. Bush was Bush. Nixon was Nixon. ect. ect. Statements like the one I have quoted here and worthless in any type of real discussion because they have no basis in reality. No one but Hitler is the same as Hitler. And to try and juxtapose 2 very different situations in this manner wouldn't even pass muster in a 10th grade debate class.

comment #20

DavidF says ...

Yeah, the more he makes comparisons like that, the more Greyson shows his stance is more about passion than logic and truth.

He mentions the Gaza "massacre" without saying what triggered it. It is not irrelevant that it came after years of regular missile attacks by Hamas, targeting civilians. Worse, they were fired from residential areas to result in Arab deaths, allowing people like Mr. Greyson to write letters later.

I would not dispute Israeli soldiers killed Arab civilians but surely the context is relevant.

Similarly, he describes Netanyahu as an alleged war criminal ("alleged" being the key word) while ignoring who is now running the show in Gaza and the West Bank. I assure you, it's not the resurrection of Mahatma Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr., finally able to work together.

If I thought Greyson would respond similarly to a series on Pyongyang, Tehran or Damascus that would be another matter but it strikes me as unlikely.

That letter could have been written anytime in the last 40 years; not because Israel is Evil Incarnate but because we see what we want to see and demonizing Israel above other countries is a growth industry.

So, it's clearly unbalanced and, thus, not constructive. But, like the man said so many moons ago, ain't nothing new under the sun.

comment #21

hunterd says ...

RE: EDWARD

"I concur with DeafBrown and GK, now if only the US would put more pressure on Israel to clean up their act towards the Palestinians: building walls, creating ghettos. One would think Israel would see the parallels."

Wow...seriously. It took 4 comments posts to go there?

Lemme explain something to you Edward. A: Nazism is nothing like the situation in Israel. B: The "parallels" only exist in your mind because you probably don't read more than 2-3 paragraphs into any news story.

Let's break down this Israel=Nazis argument.

First off, it's equivocation, as I explained above. There is no debate to be had because your premise is fundamentally flawed.

But why compare the Israeli government (which is often conflated with just "Jews") with the Third Reich? Surely there is a more accurate comparison which involves crimes and blood on both sides. So why do we see Nazism brought up time and time again?

Is it perhaps because if the "Jews" can act just like Nazis then Nazism itself is excused. If "Jews" can be Nazis then there is nothing special or specific about what happened in Europe during the 1930s and 40s. It's just another case of humans destroying humans. If this is so, then there is no need for a Jewish state in the first place. The entire history of almost every world government turning a blind eye toward Hitler because they didn't want to "import a Jewish problem" (to quote the Australian government) is erased.

And if Israel is an illegitimate nation...why does it exist? The initial statement also implies an international Jewish conspiracy to bamboozle the world into stealing lands from "innocent" people and giving it to "undeserving" Jews. Where does this sentiment come from? "The Protocols of Zion" written by Nikolai II's people during the final years of his rule and spread out to the Russian people as a way of distracting them from his failures. It launched a long series of Pogroms which, frankly is exactly what those who use this vile brand of logical fallacy want to do as well.

And you know what's funny? You know who employed many ideas and concepts from The Protocols of Zion? Both Hitler, and Hezbollah.

Your arguments are nothing short of out and out antisemitism. There are a great many charges that could be brought against Israel. It's a shitty nation that does nothing to help itself in the international spotlight. But at the same time, I see arguments like yours all the time. Very rarely do I see arguments against Israel that are based in sound reason. And that. to me, is a pretty good sign of exactly why Israel needs to exist. Without, we're very near to Pogroms once more.

comment #22

Gnome de Guerre says ...

hunterd... a "shitty nation"? What does that mean? Shitty like Russia? Shitty like the UK? Shitty like Canada? Shitty like the US? Shitty like Afghanistan? Shitty like China? Or shitty like Zimbabwe? Not pushing you to equivocate, as I fully agree with your equivocation argument. But could you be a bit more specific? Perhaps you mean "it's a nation with shitty policies", like one could describe many other nations on this shitty little planet. So yeah, just wondering.

comment #23

liz says ...

Ok, colour me confused but what the heck does this Isreal = Nazi discussion have to with Greyson's objections? Both sides are guilty of using dirty tactics to achieve their goals. I dont think anyone's disputing that. The bottom line unless some resolution is reached over Isreal's illegal occupation of Palistinian lands, this riff-raff between each side isnt going to disappear anytime soon so where are we as the international community meant to stand?

comment #24

DavidF says ...

Liz - you're right in that the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is not going to get solved on this board.

I think the relevant question is about the meaning and effects of Greyson's actions.

We should be clear:
What he is doing is pulling out of an artistic festival because he believes that the festival is cowtowing to an oppressive regime as evidenced by the fact they are featuring several films about a city which is in a country whose policies he disagrees with.

If the film festival featured a series of films about, say, Kansas City, in 2005, would he have pulled out because he was disgusted with President Bush's Iraq policy? That's the level of discourse we're talking about here. That's the reasoning he is applying.

If you ask me, there are several leaps of logic to get from the start to the finish there.

My humble opinion is that his choice is neither constructively contributing to resolving the conflict nor helping in having an intelligent debate about it.

Further, because (IMHO) his opinions are based on faulty logic, misinformation and double-standards there is a secondary issue - not of whether he anti-Semitic, because that's clearly going too far- but about how easy it is to spin rhetoric and opinion as fact and thus not only fail to contribute to a solution but in fact perpetuate and exacerbate negative feelings.

That's what I think Greyson is doing and I think it's a shame.

comment #25

DeeZee says ...

"Greyson essentially feels that Tel Aviv and the Israeli government have too much blood and militaristic aggression and kad karma on their plate to warrant partnership with a forward-thinking film festival like Toronto's."

Yes, because the Brits and French never resorted to engaging in bloody warfare to establish Canada.

"""Isn't such an uncritical celebration of Tel Aviv right now akin to celebrating Montgomery buses in 1963, California grapes in 1969, Chilean wines in 1973, Nestles infant formula in 1984, or South African fruit in 1991?"

So when we watch your films, are we celebrating Indian reservations?

"the campaign is seen as the last hope for forcing Israel to comply with international law."

Speaking of which, when are you assholes going to stop clubbing seals?

"(a) the devastating Gaza massacre of eight months ago, resulting in over 1000 civilian deaths;"

How many civilian deaths are in Darfur again?

"the election of a Prime Minister (Benjamin Netanyahu) accused of war crimes; "

Didn't your country elect Stephens, even though he supported the Iraq war?

"the aggressive extension of illegal Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands;"

I don't exactly see the Arab countries letting go of Kurd territory any time soon.

"the viral growth of the totalitarian security wall"

As opposed to a totalitarian education system where children are raised to be mass-murderers?

"the further enshrining of the check-point system."

How about the further enshrining of stoning women for being raped?

joncro: "Anti Israeli feelings are NOT antisemitism."

If they're not anti-Semitic, then why do members of anti-Israeli groups like to assault people of Jewish origin and vandalize their homes and temples?

GKL: "And of course the Palestinians have not helped their situation, especially not when dividing themselves into factions and continuing to shoot homemade rockets into civilian areas. They are demonised internationally, Israel are not, that is the main cause for outrage."

I love how it's less outrageous that the Palestinians are attacking innocent people, but because Israel's trying to defend itself from those attacks, that's the real problem in your eyes.

"Plus, antisemitism is technically incorrect: semites are any peoples from the southwestern aisan region, therefore Palestinians are semites too."

Oh, and the Holocaust wasn't mainly an anti-Jewish thing, because other victims were thrown into the mix.

"Yes, Palestinian leaders have used the conflict in elections and at rallys to galvanise public opinion, but they are no more guilty of it than Bush or Netanyahu or any other leader exploiting conflict for their own means."

Um, except that the Palestinians voted for Hamas, so...

Davidf: "His little boycottl strikes me as pointless, especially given that Tel Aviv is a left-wing, modern town."

Sort of like Amnesty's boycott of Leonard Cohen's concert was pointless, because the proceeds were going to go to causes which Amnesty would support.

comment #26

Travis Crabtree says ...

I hope when this film goes to Blu-Ray they do some clean-up in the mastering. I can totally see the wires holding that bird in place.

comment #27

GKLondon says ...

Dee Zee,

I didn't say it was less outrageous, I said they were equally outrageous, but that international media spends more time sympathising with the Israeli side of the issue and not the human rights issue in The West Bank and the Gaza Strip. I'm not taking sides, I'm honestly expressing my bias, am aware of it, and act to address it.

I find invoking the Holocaust, on both sides, to be crass and insensitive. I've heard many Palestinians liken the situation to their own Holocaust, it is not, and it is irresponsible to say so. It is a human rights violation though.

Apart from rebutting any and every point made, do you have anything constructive to add to this discussion? Or should we think of you as the sarcastic, quiet type, standing in the corner, thinking all of this but with no balls to actually say anything. React to the thoughts of others, but try to mix it with some of your own. I'm genuinely interested to hear them.

Now if only Netanyahu and Abbas would read these talkbacks, we could end this conflict in two shakes of a lambs tale.

comment #28

ROTC says ...

Actually, GK, I think DeeZee (for a change) did a terrific job of surgically gutting your naive stated positions to shreds. Besides, other than invoking your friendship with many Palestinians (i.e., the definition of a biased opinion), what have you contributed here that is of any factual substance? I haven't seen anything more from you than a shout-out to your Palestinian buddies and a trivial concession that you believe this is a "grey issue."

Arab leadership throughout the world, including that of the Palestinians, has committed exponentially more human rights and civilian atrocities than the Israelis have ever been accused of. As I noted above, and which you have shrugged off, Palestinians as a matter of policy, principle and dogma are formally committed to the annihilation of the Israeli people. That means Palestinians are formally committed to a policy of total genocide. So who among your sacrosanct friends - especially those who work for Al Jazeera - is prepared to stand up and vocally renounce the Palestinian charter, at least for the sake of peace? And how long do you think they would survive amidst their Hamas-supporting brethren if they did?

I think it comes down to this: If the Palestinians could massacre each and every Israeli, they have publicly vowed and demonstrated that they would do so in a heartbeat.

Meanwhile, for decades, Israel has had the ability to massacre each and every Palestinian. They have not.

Whatever shades of grey you may insist lie therein, whatever mistakes have been made, they won't change the only reasonable conclusion,: Supporters of Israel are clearly on the correct, moral side of this conflict.

Back to work ...

comment #29

bmcintire says ...

I can't believe I am saying this, but Travis Crabtree FTW.

comment #30

Mary22 says ...

It is John Greyson who is politicizing TIFF and abusing for his own political ends.

I wonder if John Greyson's big public hissy fit about TIFF has anything to do with him being on the Advisory Board of the Toronto Palestinian Film Festival and always pushing for a world-wide boycott of anything even remotely related to Israel?

Knowing what TIFF's plans were, one wonders why he waited to the last moment to withdraw, rather than just in the beginning many months ago withdrawing?

comment #31

free online games says ...

You had perfect guidelines there. I did a search on the matter and identified that likely most of us will agree with your web page.

comment #32

sikis says ...

sikiş izle

sikiş

porno izle

sikiş hikayesi

sex izle

cinsel